Even as we complain of obstructionism in Washington, we teach similar practices locally. That’s the only way I can interpret “Fighting Back” in the Sunday, September 7, issue. The meeting, aimed at fighting and prevailing against the Atlantic Coast Pipeline was rich in advice about where to write and lobby and how to take legal steps. It was remarkably devoid, however, of useful tips on what to say.
There was an abundance of emotionally charged statements, such as, “…and how the pipeline will harm you and your property and all the things that are special about Augusta…” and “…will fragment our forests forever.” And also, “…no upside for us and potentially a lot of downside” and “…would affect property values and could affect mortgages” and “Dominion could not have made a worse decision.”
Added were some smart tips on actions designed to obstruct: “…obtain conservation easements for their property,” and “…information about a Norfolk law firm that fights eminent domain cases, and …doesn’t bill for services unless a suit is won.”
All this is a classic presentation of the “Not in My Back Yard” approach, which is aimed expressly at transferring the nuisance to someone else’s back yard – presumably someone poorer and less influential. A society gluttonous for energy should not be so quick to push the consequences onto less fortunate neighbors.
In the spirit of “Let us reason together,” there are fundamental questions that could and should be raised constructively – meaning not that we have the answers, but that we want answers. Such matters might include the actual need in our tri-state area for gas from the Utica and Marcellus shales; alternative means of transport; and site-selection policies such as the use of existing rights of way (Interstate Highways, etc.) versus new trailblazing in undeveloped areas.
This is a time to express our values clearly regarding environmental protection, safety, local benefits, and all such matters. Presenting them as absolute project-killers may well lead quickly to a dead end. Demanding that they be considered may profoundly improve the planning process.
(This was published as a Letter to the Editor on September 11, 2014 by the Waynesboro, VA News Virginian.)